Midreshei Halakhah

• All Midreshei Halakhah follow the order of the Torah’s verses as opposed to the topical organization found in other branches of Tannaitic literature (e.g. Mishnah and Tosefta).
• These midrashim employ various methods of derash (and some peshat interpretation) to derive halakhot from the verses, or to link halakhot to the verses.²
• The text is often dialectical and complex, with frequent obscure statements and arguments.³
• Despite an orientation toward halakhic issues,⁴ the Midreshei Halakhah contain a significant amount of agaddic material as well.

• Common names – ‏מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל, מכילתא דרבי שמעון בר יוחאי, ספרא, ספרי במדבר, ספרי דברים, ספרי זוטא במדבר, ספרי זוטא דברים, מכילתא דברים ‎‏
• Other names – See individual pages for each Midrash.
  

3rd century CE⁵

The Midreshei Halakhah were redacted in Eretz Yisrael, although they also contain teachings from Babylonian sages.⁶

Mishnaic Hebrew⁷

Modern scholarship⁹ has identified two distinct schools of Tannaitic midrash within the literature of Midrash Halakhah – the school of R. Yishmael and the school of R. Akiva. Following is a summary of the findings that have come to light in characterizing these schools.

• Methodological differences – Through analysis of the teachings of R. Yishmael and R. Akiva, the founders of the two schools, scholars have discerned consistent differences¹⁰ in approach between these two sages, and between their schools in general.¹¹
• R. Yishmael’s approach tends to remain closer to the simple reading of verses than does that of R. Akiva.
• R. Akiva expounds phenomena such as doubled verbs, synonymous nouns, repetitive concluding verses of passages, and repetition of entire passages. On his view, such redundancies are ‘superfluous’ and thus to be expounded to teach something new.
• R. Yishmael views such phenomena as simply the ordinary use of language – “The Torah speaks in human language” – and thus not as a basis for exposition.¹²
• R. Yishmael relies more on rules¹³ and comparisons between verses. R. Akiva focuses more on the individual verse and specific words and letters.¹⁴
• When using rules of exposition, R. Yishmael tends to limit their application, while R. Akiva employs them more freely.¹⁵
• Criteria for differentiating between the schools’ literature – Following are the criteria that led scholars to view the various collections of Midreshei Halakhah as produced by one of the two distinct schools:
• Prevalence of the methods described above
• Terminology characteristic of a particular school¹⁶
• Names of principal sages¹⁷
• Particular expositions that represent the consistent and recurrent opinion of one specific school
• Anonymous statements in a particular collection of Midrash Halakhah that are attributed in other sources to either R. Yishmael or R. Akiva
• Attribution of particular midrash collections to specific schools
• School of R. Akiva – ‏‏‏מכילתא דרבי שמעון בר יוחאי, ספרא¹⁸‏ , ספרי דברים, ספרי זוטא במדבר, ספרי זוטא דברים¹⁹
• School of R. Yishmael – מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל, ספרא²⁰, ספרי במדבר, מכילתא דברים

• Manuscripts –
• Printings –
• Textual layers –

• – 

• – 

• – 

• – 

• –

• – 

• – 

• – 

• –